Connect with us

News

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk explains why Blue Origin’s Starship lawsuit makes no sense

The battle between NASA and Blue Origin over SpaceX's HLS Starship Moon lander continues. (SpaceX/Blue Origin)

Published

4 years ago

on

For the first time since SpaceX competitor Blue Origin took NASA to federal court after losing a Moon lander contract to Starship and a protest over that loss, unsealed documents have finally revealed the argument Jeff Bezos’ space startup is focusing on in court.

After the details broke in new court documents filed on Wednesday, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk weighed in on Twitter to offer his take on why the arguments Blue Origin has hinged its lawsuit on make very little sense.

While one seemingly significant portion of the main complaint claiming to reveal “additional substantial errors” in SpaceX’s Starship HLS proposal was almost fully redacted, most of the opening argument is legible. In short, Blue Origin appears to have abandoned the vast majority of arguments it threw about prior to suing NASA and the US government and is now almost exclusively hinging its case on the claim that SpaceX violated NASA’s procurement process by failing to account for a specific kind of prelaunch review before every HLS-related Starship launch.

For NASA’s HLS competition, SpaceX proposed to create a custom variant of Starship capable of serving as a single-stage-to-orbit crewed Moon lander with the help of the rest of the Starship fleet – including Super Heavy boosters, cargo/tanker Starships, and a depot or storage ship. SpaceX would begin a Moon landing campaign by launching a (likely heavily modified) depot Starship into a stable Earth orbit. Anywhere from 8 to 14 Starship tanker missions – each carrying around 100-150 tons of propellant – would then gradually fill that depot ship over the course of no more than six or so months. Once filled, an HLS lander would launch to orbit, refill its tanks from the depot ship, and make its way to an eccentric lunar orbit to rendezvous with NASA’s Orion spacecraft and three Artemis astronauts.

As Blue Origin has exhaustively reminded anyone within earshot for the last five months, SpaceX’s Starship Moon lander proposal is extremely complex and NASA is taking an undeniable risk (of delays, not for astronauts) by choosing SpaceX. Nevertheless, NASA’s Kathy Lueders and a source evaluation panel made it abundantly clear in public selection statement that SpaceX’s proposal was by far the most competent, offering far a far superior management approach and technical risk no worse than Blue Origin’s far smaller, drastically less capable lander.

Advertisement

The bulk of Blue Origin’s argument appears to be that its National Team Lander proposal was drastically disadvantaged by the fact that SpaceX may or may not have incorrectly planned for just three ‘flight readiness reviews’ (FRRs) for each 16-launch HLS Starship mission. While heavily redacted, Blue Origin wants a judge to believe that contrary to the US Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) fair assessment that such a small issue is incredibly unlikely to have changed the competition’s outcome, it would have “been able to propose a substantially lower price” for its lander. To be clear, a flight readiness review is an admittedly important part of NASA’s safety culture, but it ultimately amounts to paperwork and doublechecks over the course of a day or two of meetings.

All else equal, the need to complete an FRR before a launch is incredibly unlikely to cause more than a few days of delays in a worst-case scenario and would have next to no cost impact. There is no reasonable way to argue that being allowed to complete some launches without an FRR would have singlehandedly allowed Blue Origin to “[engineer] and [propose] an entirely different architecture.” Nevertheless, that’s exactly what the company attempts to argue – that it would have radically and completely changed the design it spent more than half a billion dollars sketching out if it had only been able to skip a few reviews.

Curiously, Blue Origin nevertheless does make a few coherent and seemingly fact-based arguments in the document. Perhaps most notably, it claims that when NASA ultimately concluded that it didn’t have funds for even a single award (a known fact) and asked SpaceX – its first choice – to make slight contract modifications to make the financial side of things work, NASA consciously chose to waive the need for an FRR before every HLS Starship launch. Only via purported cost savings from those waived reviews, Blue Origin claims, was NASA able to afford SpaceX’s proposal – which, it’s worth noting, was more than twice as cheap as the next cheapest option (Blue Origin).

Ultimately, it thus appears that Blue Origin may have a case to make that NASA awarded SpaceX the HLS Option A contract despite a handful of errors that violated contracting rules and the HLS solicitation. Relative to just about any other possible issue, though, it’s hard not to perceive the problems Blue Origin may or may have correctly pointed out as anything more than marginal and extraordinarily unlikely to have changed the outcome in Blue’s favor had they been rectified before the award. Most importantly, even if Blue Origin’s argument is somehow received favorably and a judge orders NASA to overturn its SpaceX HLS award and reconsider all three proposals, it’s virtually inconceivable that even that best-case outcome would result in Blue Origin receiving a contract of any kind.

Advertisement
Related Topics:

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Tesla’s next-gen Optimus prototype with Grok revealed

The video shows a new Optimus prototype answering questions and taking some very robotic steps, evidently revealing that the next-generation version is in its early stages of development.

Published

57 minutes ago

on

September 3, 2025

By

Tesla’s next-generation Optimus robot with AI assistant Grok has been revealed in a new video shared on X.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk was with Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff last night, and it appears the frontman gave Benioff an exclusive look at some upcoming technology.

Tesla talks Semi ramp, Optimus, Robotaxi rollout, FSD with Wall Street firm

The video shows a new Optimus prototype answering questions and taking some very robotic steps, evidently revealing that the next-generation version is in its early stages of development. It features Grok for some additional utility, as it answered questions Benioff asked in the short video.

Here’s what was uploaded to X:

It appears that there are several big changes to this next-generation version of Optimus, some of which have been discussed by Musk and Tesla in the past.

The first is purely cosmetic, but the gold color that Optimus is wearing in this is a new and fresh look that we have not seen before.

Perhaps the most interesting change that is evident here is the hands, which are much more detailed than past versions of Optimus:

However, we’re not too sure that these are what will be released with the next-gen Optimus, because they don’t appear to be functional, and they are more reminiscent of mannequin hands than anything.

The hands on Optimus have been a significant part of the program, as they are among the most crucial pieces of equipment on a robot. It needs to be able to perform both delicate and more imposing tasks. Tesla has aimed for Optimus to be able to thread needles or play the piano.

It was one of the most discussed improvements the company mentioned in past comments regarding how it planned to improve from Gen 2 to this next version.

Musk mentioned regarding Optimus:

“Next-generation Optimus hand, which we have in prototype form, has actuators that have moved to the forearm, just like humans, and they operate the fingers through cables, just like human hands.”

Within Optimus lies a significant opportunity for Tesla to gain considerable strength in terms of market share and valuation.

If Tesla can efficiently develop and deploy the humanoid robot over the next several years, the company stands to gain, as companies will utilize it for tasks that require tedious labor.

Musk recently said Optimus will be a major contributor to Tesla’s valuation moving forward. He believes it will make up roughly 80 percent of the company’s value.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla CEO Elon Musk to provide more details for Master Plan Part IV

Musk stated that he would be adding specifics to the plan in a later update.

Published

4 hours ago

on

September 3, 2025

By

Credit: xAI/X

Tesla CEO Elon Musk will be adding more specifics to the recently-released Master Plan Part IV. Musk shared the update on social media platform X amidst conversations about the general nature of the Master Plan Part IV. 

In a conversation on X, Musk responded to a post from Tesla retail shareholder and bull Dave Lee, who observed that the currently released Master Plan Part IV could really just be the introduction to the real plan due to its absence of specifics.

Elon Musk responded, stating that he would be adding specifics to the plan in a later update. “Fair enough. Will add more specifics,” Musk wrote in his post.

Tesla has been following Elon Musk’s Master Plans for decades. The first Master Plan, released in 2006, outlined the company’s path from the original Tesla Roadster to the Model 3, as well as the first steps for Tesla Energy. Master Plan Part Deux, released in 2016, covered the ramp of Tesla Energy, the expansion of Tesla’s vehicle lineup, and the rollout of a Robotaxi service.

Master Plan Part 3 was more ambitious as it was generally an in-depth proposal for achieving a global sustainable entry economy by transitioning to electricity-powered vehicles, homes, and industry, which will, in turn, be powered by renewable energy sources like solar and wind. Master Plan Part 3 also included a five-step plan to accomplish this, allowing the world to transition to a fully electrified future. 

Advertisement

Master Plan Part IV, which was released a few days ago, focused on automation and artificial intelligence to achieve sustainable abundance. But while the first two Master Plans were very clear and specific and Master Plan Part 3 was very in-depth, Master Plan Part IV was quite general and vague in comparison. It was easy to tell that Optimus would play a big role in the pursuit of sustainable abundance, but apart from that, there were no specifics as to how Tesla intended to achieve its goals.

Fortunately, these specifics would be discussed by Musk in a later update to the plan.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla just had its best wholesale month this year in China

Tesla China’s wholesale figures include both vehicles that are sold domestically and exported abroad.

Published

5 hours ago

on

September 3, 2025

By

Credit: Tesla China

Tesla China just had its best wholesale month this 2025 so far. In August, the electric vehicle maker sold 83,192 vehicles wholesale, a 22.55% increase compared to July 2025’s 67,886 units.

Tesla China’s wholesale figures are still down year-over-year, but the company’s momentum seems notable, especially with the arrival of the Model Y L.

August 2025 figures

As noted in a CNEV Post report, August 2025’s 83,192 wholesale figures are 4.04% less than the 86,697 units that were sold in the same period last year. It is, however, a 22.55% improvement from the previous month. From January to August, Tesla China sold 515,552 units wholesale, a 12.24% year-over-year decrease. 

It should be noted that Tesla China’s wholesale figures include both vehicles that are sold domestically and exported abroad. With this in mind, August’s results bode well for Tesla China, as it suggests that Gigafactory Shanghai is now hitting its pace with both its domestic deliveries and its exports. Giga Shanghai serves as Tesla’s primary vehicle export hub.

Model Y L factor

Tesla had a challenging first quarter this year, thanks in part to the changeover to the Model Y across the Fremont factory, Giga Texas, Giga Shanghai, and Giga Berlin-Brandenburg. This changeover resulted in low sales in the first quarter. Political controversies surrounding Elon Musk and violence against Tesla stores and vehicles in the first and second quarters in the United States and Europe did not help much either.

Advertisement

This Q3, however, Tesla seems to be hitting its stride, especially in China. The launch of the new Model Y L has allowed Tesla to compete in the six-seat, large SUV segment, a market that was previously closed to the standard Model Y. Reports have suggested that Tesla China has been seeing a lot of demand for the Model Y L, which should help the company achieve higher sales this quarter and the remaining months of the year.

Continue Reading

Trending